Balancing form-focused and content-focused feedback: an innovative approach to teaching short paragraph writing for English-majored students
Abstract: 286
| 
PDF: 150 
##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##
Author
Keywords:
Abstract
This study is aimed at investigating the current practices in the application of Form-Focused Feedback (FFF) and Content-Focused Feedback (CFF) to the revision of short academic paragraphs written by first-year English-major students. Additionally, the study seeks to explore students’ perceptions and expectations regarding these two types of feedback, thereby proposing an integrated feedback model to enhance the teaching and learning of academic writing skills. The researchers conducted a quantitative survey with 100 students and qualitative interviews with 20 students and 10 lecturers. The findings indicate that instructors predominantly focus on grammatical and syntactic errors, while other formal errors tend to be overlooked. Students highly value FFF; however, they also express strong expectations for in-depth CFF that supports idea development and argumentation. The study proposes an integrated feedback model that balances CFF and FFF.
References
-
[1] D. R. Ferris and B. Roberts, “Error feedback in L2 writing classes: How explicit does it need to be?”, Journal of Second Language Writing, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 161–184, 2001.
[2] R. Ellis, “A typology of written corrective feedback types”, ELT Journal, vol. 63, no. 2, pp. 97–107, 2009.
[3] J. Bitchener and U. Knoch, “The contribution of written corrective feedback to language development: A ten-month investigation”, Applied Linguistics, vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 193–214, 2010.
[4] K. Hyland and F. Hyland, Eds., Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2006.
[5] L. M. Goldstein, “Questions and comments: An exploration of written teacher response” in Teacher Written Commentary in Second Language Writing Classrooms, L. M. Goldstein, Ed. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press, 2004, pp. 57–83.
[6] Y. Sheen, “The effect of focused written corrective feedback and language aptitude on ESL learners’ acquisition of articles”, TESOL Quarterly, vol. 41, no. 2, pp. 255–283, 2007.
[7] D. R. Ferris, “The ‘grammar correction’ debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime…?)”, Journal of Second Language Writing, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 49–62, 2004.
[8] J. Bitchener and D. R. Ferris, Written Corrective Feedback in Second Language Acquisition and Writing. Routledge, 2012.
[9] K. Hyland and F. Hyland, Eds., Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 2019.
[10] J. Bitchener and N. Storch, Written Corrective Feedback for L2 Development. Multilingual Matters, 2016.
[11] N. Sommers, “Responding to student writing”, College Composition and Communication, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 148–156, 1982.
[12] V. Zamel, “Responding to student writing”, TESOL Quarterly, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 79–101, 1985.
[13] J. Truscott, “The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes”, Language Learning, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 327–369, 1996.
[14] P. D. Ware and R. O’Dowd, “Peer feedback on language form in telecollaboration”, Language Learning & Technology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 43–63, 2008.
[15] M. C. Ho and S. J. Savignon, “Face-to-face and computer-mediated peer review in EFL writing”, CALICO Journal, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 269–290, 2007.
[16] L. Flower and J. R. Hayes, “A cognitive process theory of writing”, College Composition and Communication, vol. 32, no. 4, pp. 365–387, 1981.
[17] C. Evans, “Making Sense of Assessment Feedback in Higher Education”, Review of Educational Research, vol. 83, no. 1, pp. 70–120, 2013.
[18] M. Li and R. Barnard, Eds., Teachers’ Voices from the Asian EFL Classroom: Issues and Challenges in ELT. Routledge, 2021.
[19] J. W. Strijbos and A. Wichmann, “Promoting learning by leveraging the collaborative and iterative nature of formative peer assessment with and without digital technologies”, The Journal of the Learning Sciences, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 5–16, 2018.
##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.sidebar##
